Lissy Mathew v. The Meenachil East Urban Co Operative Bank Ltd.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/2ND POUSHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 39851 of 2015 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------------------- LISSY MATHEW, W/O. MATHEW SEBASTIAN, KALAPPURACKAL HOUSE, CHENNADU P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 581.
BY ADVS.SRI.BABY THOMAS, SRI.K.D.ZACHARIAS, SRI.JOJO T.ZACHARIAS, SMT.MARIAMMA JOSEPH, SRI.K.ANIL JOSEPH.
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE MEENACHIL EAST URBAN CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.4266, HEAD OFFICE, POONJAR THEKKEKARA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 582.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE MEENACHIL EAST URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.4266, CHENNAD BRANCH, CHENNAD P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 581.
BY ADV. SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 39851 of 2015 (F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1 COPY OF THE LOAN ACCOUNT STATEMENT DATED 02/12/2015. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE SALE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12/11/2015.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 39851 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 23nd day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who had availed a loan from the respondent bank, defaulted in repayment of the same. Consequently, the respondent bank initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act', to recover the loan amounts. Ext.P2 is the sale notice issued to the petitioner under the SARFAESI Act. In the writ petition, the petitioner impugns the steps initiated by the respondent bank for recovery of the loan amounts.
2.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I note that the sole prayer of the petitioner is to permit her to remit the balance amounts outstanding to the bank in easy installments. Taking into account the plea of financial hardship raised by the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with the following directions:-
-2W.P.(C). No.39851 of 2015 (i) The total overdue amount, in respect of the loan, is stated to be Rs.3,30,726/- together with accrued interest. Accordingly, if the petitioner remits the aforesaid amount of Rs.3,30,726/- together with accrued interest in eight equal and successive monthly installments commencing from 05.01.2016, and continues to keep up the regular installments as per the original loan schedule, then the recovery steps initiated against her by the respondent bank shall be kept in abeyance.
(ii) It is made clear that if the petitioner commits a default in respect of any of the installments, she will lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondent bank will be free to continue the recovery proceedings against her from the stage at which they presently stand.
(iii) The respondent bank shall, within ten days from today, provide the petitioner with an upto-date statement of accounts so as to enable the petitioner to discharge the liability in accordance with the directions of this judgment.
sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /23.12.15